On March 28, 2022, Rep. Stephen Lynch (MA-08), Chair of the House Committee on Financial Services' Task Force on Financial Technology, introduced H.R. 7231 - The Electronic Currency and Secure Hardware (ECASH) Act (full text here).
The ECASH Act is co-sponsored by Rep.'s Jesús G. “Chuy” García (IL-04), Rashida Tlaib (MI-13), Ayanna Pressley (MA-07), and Alma Adams (NC-12) of the Committee on Financial Services, and endorsed by Americans for Financial Reform, Demand Progress, the Action Center on Race and the Economy (ACRE), and Public Money Action.
The bill directs the Secretary of the Treasury to develop and pilot digital dollar technologies that replicate the privacy-respecting features of physical cash, in order to promote greater financial inclusion, maximize consumer protection and data privacy, and advance U.S. efforts to develop and regulate digital assets.
For a list of media coverage, click here.
1. What does the ECASH Act do?
4. What is a bearer instument?
5. Does E-Cash involve blockchain or distributed ledger technology?
6. What distinguishes E-Cash from other forms of digital money?
7. Why use E-Cash over other forms of digital money/payments?
8. Why issue this via the Treasury and not the Federal Reserve?
11. Are there any limits to the use of E-Cash?
14. Won't digitally minting E-Cash be inflationary?
15. Doesn't this undermine Monetary Policy and threaten Federal Reserve independence?
The ECASH Act:
The ECASH Act defines e-cash as a currency instrument that is:
Importantly, E-Cash is
not:
An E-Cash device is any piece of secured hardware issued and/or authorised by the government for the purpose of receiving, holding, and transferring e-cash balances.
In contrast to ledger-based systems (including those that use a blockchain and/or distributed-ledger rather than a centralized ledge), which prevent double-spending by verifying unspent balances against a common record of all previous transactions, e-cash devices verify funds locally via a dedicated or trusted computing environment located on the device itself.
This allows it to facilitate both offline and genuine peer-to-peer transactions without generating transactional data or requiring the approval of third party intermediaries or network validator nodes.
There are a variety of potential forms such devices may take, which is why the ECASH Act directs the U.S. Treasury to experiment with multiple pilot designs simultaneously.
However, the most common forms, and thus most likely to be adopted initially, are a payments card and a secured chip environment on a cell phone.
For example, this is the offline-capable smart payments card that was
introduced in China in 2021as part of its digital Yuan rollout, :
This is the Avant stored-value card, which was capable of anonymous, peer-to-peer payments using a custom-made card reader device. It was was issued by the Bank of Finland in 1992, making it (arguably) the world's first Central Bank Digital Currency.
A bearer instrument represents a legal obligation to pay whoever has legitimate physical possession of the instrument.
Many forms of monetary obligations have circulated as bearer instruments over the millennia, including paper notes, wooden tally sticks, and more recently, electronic value claims stored on secured hardware devices or recorded on open ledgers.
Bearer instruments are typically contrasted with account-based monies, where the right to payment is established via authentication of a person’s identity by a third-party intermediary.
A distinct but related legal concept is that of “currency.” As monetary law expert and Cambridge Law Professor David Fox explains:
Currency is a special legal attribute which allows a recipient of money to take a fresh legal title which is good against the whole world.return to FAQ return to topMoney passes into currency in this way when it is received by a bona fide purchaser for valuable consideration. At this point the title of any previous owner of the money from whom it may have been stolen is extinguished.
It helps money to circulate readily in the economy in that it reduces the need for recipients to make detailed inquiries into the title of people who tender money in payment of debts or to buy goods.
No. In contrast to most cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and Ethereum, E-Cash is a true bearer instrument. Consequently, E-Cash transactions do not involve or require settlement via a blockchain or distributed ledger.
Instead, an E-Cash transaction works by transferring an e-cash balance, which is a unique digital representation of value issued and verified by the government, from one secure hardware device to another. The hardware devices themselves, as well as the security measures undertaken by government at the point of original issue, are responsible for preventing double-spending and counterfeiting.
For more information, see the secure hardware-related technical materials in the Other Resources section below.
return to FAQ return to top
E-Cash is the only form of digital currency that is simultaneously:
E-Cash is well-suited to individuals who:
On the other hand, E-Cash, like physical cash, does not pay interest, and offers less third-party protections than traditional bank accounts or payments app (chargebacks, loss and fraud-prevention, etc).
Consequently, even though most people will probably choose to keep some day-to-day spending money in the form of E-Cash, they are unlikely to invest all of their life savings into it. return to FAQ return to top
The Treasury has historically been responsible for designing, issuing, and securing physical currency like coins (via the Mint) and notes (via the Bureau of Engraving and Printing), as well as hardware-secured forms of retail digital money, like pre-paid debit cards and stored value cards (via the Bureau of the Fiscal Service).
Moreover, the Treasury has experience with administering large-scale retail payments programs, as well as coordinating inter-agency responses to systemically important financial technologies and industries. In addition, it possesses the the institutional expertise and political legitimacy to navigate a complex balancing act between privacy, security, law enforcement, and civil liberties interests.
Indeed, the Treasury was arguably the first agency to explore the possibility of issuing a hardware-secured, privacy-respecting form of E-Cash. As Law Professor Rohan Grey noted in his testimony to the U.S. House Committee on Financial Services' Task Force on Financial Technology Hearing on "Digitizing the Dollar: Investigating the Technological Infrastructure, Privacy, and Financial Inclusion Implications of Central Bank Digital Currencies" on June 21, 2021:
In 1995, the Electronic Money Task Force of the Treasury Department proposed the creation of a study commission into the creation of a Mint-issued digital currency card, as part of Vice President Gore’s broader National Performance Review initiative to “reinvent government” in light of emerging internet and other digital technologies.In an October 1995 hearing before the House Banking Committee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy on the topic of “The Future of Money,” then-Director of the U.S. Mint, Philip Diehl, testified that the Mint’s “main interest in the evolution of payments system is ... focused on stored value cards as a potential substitute for coins and currency.”
Diel Further noted that: “As sole provider of the nation’s coinage, the Mint has an important role in our monetary system. As the use of stored value cards evolves, many consumers might be expected to replace coinage and currency transactions with ‘e-cash’ transactions, thus creating a new de facto form of currency...
It is [thus] appropriate to ask the question whether at some point in the future the requirements of market efficiency could accelerate the federal government’s role in producing a stored value card that would augment the use of coinage in commercial transactions.
By contrast, the Federal Reserve has been researching and exploring the possibility of issuing a Central Bank Digital Currency, or "CBDC," for some time, and up until this point it has shown little interest, if not outright hostility, towards a CBDC model that is 1) capable of anonymous payments, 2) structured as a legal bearer instrument, 3) issued directly to the public, and 4) built on secure hardware.
For example, in January of 2022, the Federal Reserve released its long-awaited CBDC report, in which it noted that "the Federal Reserve Act does not authorize direct Federal Reserve accounts for individuals, and such accounts would represent a significant expansion of the Federal Reserve’s role in the financial system and the economy."
Consequently, it recommended the adoption of an "intermediated model", whereby the "private sector [including commercial banks and regulated nonbank financial service providers] would offer accounts or digital wallets to facilitate the management of CBDC holdings and payments [and] operate in an open market for CBDC services."
In addition, the Federal Reserve noted that:
Financial institutions in the United States are subject to robust rules that are designed to combat money laundering and the financing of terrorism. A CBDC would need to be designed to comply with these rules.Similarly, in February 2022, the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Digital Currency Initiative released a Report on Phase 1 of their collaborative Project Hamilton, titled "A High Performance Payment Processing System Designed for Central Bank Digital Currencies," in which they noted thatIn practice, this would mean that a CBDC intermediary would need to verify the identity of a person accessing CBDC, just as banks and other financial institutions currently verify the identities of their customers.
[...] In this regard, a CBDC would differ materially from cash, which enables anonymous transactions."
Offline payments We have not yet explored the potential for payments using CBDC without an Internet connection. Our transaction format and data model requires interactive communication between the central bank and both transacting parties.Moreover, the Federal Reserve by its own admission has limited institutional capacity to provide retail payments services directly, and lacks the institutional expertise or political legitimacy to make decisions regarding how to balance civil liberties and law enforcement/national security interests on behalf of the broader public.One option is to operate a parallel system using trusted hardware requiring no connectivity with the central bank to conduct a transaction. Trusted hardware would be responsible for enforcing the authenticity of CBDC while outside central bank systems, and thus vulnerable to supply chain attacks or end-user tampering.
Instead, the Federal Reserve System is staffed primarily by economists trained in statistically modelling, not privacy, national security, or law enforcement experts.
Although there is broad political support for "central bank independence" nowadays, such independence has always been historically centered around issues of monetary policy (ie interest rates), not defining the future of money for the entire nation over the objections and concerns of elected officials.
To the contrary, such questions are deeply political, and consequently are best to Congress and the political executive branch, ie the President and Treasury Secretary.
No technology is 100% safe. As with physical currency, there will always be some degree of counterfeiting and fraud risk associated with physical devices capable of being held and used locally by the end-user in offline situations.
That said, secure hardware technologies have been around for decades, and there are many companies and research teams working on different models and approaches.
The ECASH Act directs the Treasury to make all software and hardware used in the development of E-Cash technology available under an appropriate open-source license.
Moreover, by hardwiring denominational (and potentially transactional) limits into the E-Cash devices themselves, policymakers will be able to reduce the possibility of individual hacks causing systemic vulnerabilities.
return to FAQ return to topThe struggle to preserve and defend privacy and individual liberties is ongoing, and cannot be won solely through technical means.
That said, the ECASH Act represents a major step towards protecting transactional privacy during the transition to a digitally native fiat currency regime. It does so by:
E-Cash is primarily intended for use by individuals, and does not exempt any person or entity from financial reporting requirements or compliance with existing criminal and civil laws.
Although the ECASH Act does not specifiy a specific per-device denominational or transactional cap, it is expected that such limits will ultimately be incorporated into the final E-Cash design following the pilot phase, similar to how physical currency has denominational caps today.
return to FAQ return to topNo. E-Cash is intended to fill the social role historically played by physical currency, which represents a relatively small fraction of overall monetary activity.
Indeed, most people prefer to keep most of their money in a bank, where it earns interest and is protected from fraud, theft, or loss.
Consequently, it is unlikely that the introduction of E-Cash will result in a noticeable outflow of deposits from the traditional banking system.
However, in the event this were to occur, the bill directs the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System to "take appropriate measures to ensure that the implementation and adoption of e-cash does not disrupt or substantially impact the general availability or cost of liquidity" or the "exten[sion of] credit and other financial services to underserved populations," provided that such measures "in no way impair, restrict, or otherwise limit the ability of the public to access, hold, and use e-cash."
return to FAQ return to topThe ECASH Act establishes permanent, ongoing appropriations authority for spending undertaken in furtherance of E-Cash, with the specific amount to be determined by the Treasury Secretary on an ongoing basis.
This spending is not funded via taxes or the issuance of public debt.
Instead, the bill directs the Federal Reserve Bank of New York to establish a special, ring-fenced overdraft account for the Treasury, and to exempt that account from standard accounting rules, in order to grant the Treasury a similar degree of operational flexibility in developing its digital dollar program as the Federal Reserve enjoys with its research and operational budget.
return to FAQ return to topNo. Like physical currency, the issuance of E-Cash will adjust automatically based on consumer demand.
Moreover, there is little difference in inflationary impact between money-financed and "debt"-financed public spending.
return to FAQ return to top
No. The Federal Reserve will continue to exercise full control over interest rates, liquidity management, and the size of its balance sheet following the introduction of Treasury-issued E-Cash, just as it does today with Treasury-issued coinage, and as it did for over 50 years during which Federal Reserve Notes and U.S. Notes were issued in parallel.
Inteed,